Why the next Xbox won't be always online or block used games

OXM's editor Jon Hicks shoots down today's big next gen rumour. "There's a germ of truth in it, which I'll get to, but releasing a console with those two requirements would be totally counter to what Microsoft needs from the next console."

A lot of these "they can't", "they simply wouldn't" wishful thinking sort of stories popping up. First Sterling's, now this. MS are a corporation, they aren't making consoles for charity, but for money. And they came from the PC space first, which has serial codes bundled with every game or games locked to service accounts. This is nothing new for them. Or for PC gamers. Someone argued to the contrary about this in another thread, but they simply don't know what they're talking about. PC games, not just online ones come bundled with serial codes, with very exceptions. You enter the serial code when you install the game.

So no, it wouldn't be outside of the realm of possibility for MS to do this. They won't care about throwing one segment of consumers under the bus in favour of constant, dependable Live subscriptions and DLC buyers. Now it remains to be seen if A.) this rumour is true. Though as we get closer to console announcements, the weight of truth > BS has been shifting and more 'rumours' are seeming credible - you just can't hide this stuff from a console set to launch in 6ish months. B.) If Sony will follow suit.

As the article points out, the industry's efforts to lock out pre-owned PC gamers are far from a success, and a console armed with a unilateral pre-owned block would face a huge, huge disadvantage at launch.

You're right, Microsoft exists to make money. This would be a terrible way of going about that.

Except PCs are OPEN, whereas consoles are CLOSED systems. So hacking, circumventing always-on DRM is par for the course with PC gaming. Its hardly so for consoles, at least no where on the same scale with regards to user concentration. That would actually be appealing to certain publishers, the idea of "locked in" games on a "locked" system. Can't get more DRMish than that.

MS come from a PC heritage, this is actually a natural move for them - people keep avoiding that fact. While I personally think that this is a bad move, I don't think that its one that would impact their paying consumer base all that much. People drum up all sorts of ire and negativity online, but that rarely translates into consumer apathy in the real world. The 40 million or whatever who readily hand over $60/ year just for the privilege of playing online have already been conditioned for this sort of move and will eat their lumps and carry on.

"So hacking, circumventing always-on DRM is par for the course with PC gaming."

But this isn't about hacking - it's about damaging your profile via needlessly draconian preventative measures and deterring potential customers. Attempts to control how players make use of their purchases via online have, provably, hit the likes of Ubisoft square in the publicity glands. Do you really think Microsoft is going to risk that kind of fallout - which would absolutely extend to the enthusiasts who account for a high proportion of launch purchases - when they're trying to sell a new console? Do you really think they want the stigma of being the only anti-pre-owned next gen outfit in town?

Microsoft's big gameplan is to turn everybody into online customers, true - that way they don't have to deal with the retailers - but doing it this way means crippling the next Xbox straight out the door.

Neither MS or Sony will go always online or block used. They would have to have rocks for brains. Areas with bad internet are still a big chunk of console sales. Wii U already allows used games, so PS4/720 coming out and saying "Hey! We won't let you do what the currently released systems do!" would be a major disadvantage.

It won't happen and isn't wishful thinking to think so. MS would NOT sell as many hardware AND software as they did this gen if they were to along with the absurd idea of requiring the 720 to be online in order to function and block used games on top of that. MS has sold 70+ million consoles this gen and the numbers will continue to grow. So why drastically change things?

I don't see how implementing the idiotic crap in rumors into the 720 will guarantee them more revenue. If they truly want money they wouldn't do that B.S.

Its rumour and I will treated as such, but if they did, then executive are looking at it with the prospect of earn income. Problem is 360 has 40 million online while the other35 million is not, thats a huge amount to loose and make or not, what keeps you alive are gamers. I only see the model working if MS gives it out nearly free in some kind of sunscription were gamers pay an amount for lets say 2 year connection. 99 dollars to start services and a monthly fee. They will have so much sales even if they block used game, but allow dowloads to be register. Im thinking, if MS could strike a deal with comcast/time warner/ and all major internet providers to suply the box with their cable, they will have a seious break through. Cable plan 2 years and charges maintenance fee, while ms charge subscrition, lol... Rachet I tell you. Anyways, it will be a missed if they do block used games, cause you will have a backlashed of contempt gamers in the millions.

Finally a article that makes sense. All edge is doing is trying to get ms to talk and make a reveal and there hurting the industry doing this. I hope this comes back and bites them in the butt. Isnt edge owned by best buy?

Anyone who believes Microsoft will block used games and always require you to be online is foolish. Yes they are a corporation and want to make money, but XBL more than makes up any money they lose on used games.

Microsoft would alienate themselves from roughly half their market share if they did these things. Around 80 million Xbox 360's are out there, only a little over 40 million are Xbox Live members. That isn't losing a little money, that is losing half your money! Think and use your head before believing every single little rumor.

Microsoft wouldn't risk being the only console this generation to cut out used games, we know Nintendo allowed used games with the Wii U. Microsoft and Sony aren't going to talk and say one way or the other if they'd do that, it'd be suicide to be the only company to block used games.

Let's not panic and say "I'm not buying it!", because we haven't heard a single confirmed piece of information from Microsoft, anything right now is speculation.

I can see them automatically signing in people for whatever reason, much like the PS3 and 360 already do. It's a no brainer that if your going to do online stuff it would require an online connection. That however has nothing to do with locking out games, just like it doesn't now.

Forcing game lockout because someone isn't connected is just bad business. SimCity itself is losing a sale from me because of this, and there was quite a commotion over Diablo because of it. In the end they served no purpose but to alienate customers, and cause some problems for the honest consumers. The flimsy argument of piracy, or in this case 2nd hand games also, just didn't hold up, and it's something even Ubisoft re-evaluated because it just wasn't working and was causing more problems than it was worth.

Anti used game tech doesn't require an online connection, based on Sony's recent patent at least. But that doesn't mean that they will do it either. That tech could be used for a variety of purposes both in gaming and out.

I know we've seen remarks from publishers who want to push this issue, and I even understand why they want to push it. But that doesn't mean that what they want is what is good for the industry or the console manufacturers. That is the difference between publishers and console manufacturers. The publisher wants to maximize revenue by cutting out consumer choice, whereas the console manufacturers have to look at what people are willing to accept and what they can sell. Console makers have to be very tuned in to market trends and consumer spending habits because they have a lot more at stake than just video games publishing.

I'm not so much scared of it being there, but the possibility of it being there. If they say it "can" do it, but launch without doing it, then whats stopping them from getting an install base and then going "oh btw, discs are locked now and you need to be online at least once an hour of gametime"

Now you are stuck with a console, and probably can't sell it since no one wants that DRM crap. I wanted DC Universe badly until they pulled the "code locked to account" stuff, then I passed on it.

They could possibly be sued for that. Introducing it later in the consoles life would cut off lifetime sales in a big way. Those that already have it, namely the hardcore, would not tolerated it. Even Steam is getting heat for that very thing, and it started with these premises in place for the most part. The casuals may not even realize that's the case, but it wouldn't take long for something so anti-consumer to make it's way to the mainstream media. MS isn't well loved by Americans, and their past anti-consumer practices have always made the mainstream press.

The only way I can see this happening is if the console makers leave it up to the publisher to decide, much like region locking on the PS3 is. If that's the case, at least we as consumers can avoid those games that decide to favor profits over consumers. The hate for the idea is strong on all sides of the fence, and I can't see this being something big publishers wouldn't try more than once or twice. The immediate and long term backlash would be a PR disaster.

I think if they do decide to do it, console makers should require big lettering or logo's somewhere on the box to indicate it is the case with that product. If publishers are so sure it will be accepted there is no reason for them to hide it in the small print on the back of the box like they do with online passes. Own your choices I say.

Damage control? Shame. You know the dude that wrote this article, once when the rumored specs of Durango was revealed to be 1.2TFlop, this guy ranted on Gamesindustry Biz website about how Msft would never do that blah blah blah. Now more and more leaks confirm it.

An easy way for Microsoft and Sony to kill off the used game market is make the consoles digital download only and this would be years from now or the generation after. I don't see either company leaving money on the table by alienating potential customers especially when they are going up against each other and now Valve. Microsoft knows the rabid fanbase and would not do something as drastic as this and still expect to be in business.

Its funny all you ps3 fanboys whenever you hear something bad about the xbox your commenting on it like its confirmed but anything good and more logical I might add now its just a rumor. If a source came out and said xbox was better you would cry rumor and say they know nothing Listen the reason that they are all saying the same thing is because they are piggy backing off each other same rumor No wonder there are more women becoming gay cause you guys are so insecure its ridiculous

Pretty sure the Sony articles to the same effect were running rampant with xbox fan boys last month. It wasn't even a rumor, just a patent filing.

The more level headed people on both sides were saying it was just a bad idea, and saw it as a bad move for gaming as a whole. This issue is bigger than console wars. And as such it would be nice if you'd stop trying to make it into part of that war.

Any decision such as this would have serious implications to our hobby and how we play games. More and more publishers are cutting out consumer choice at every turn, but fan boys are too focused on who does what among us to really notice, so all this serious stuff gets lost in the flood of trolling comments such as yours.

I'm a Sony fan myself, and with the patent last month, and now this, I find it to be very bad. I don't care which console maker decides to do it, I find it to be very anti-consumer, and a wrong direction for the industry as a whole. I prefer to make my voice heard now, as opposed to after the fact.

Blocking used games isn't really Microsoft or Sony's fault , it all comes down to publishers such as EA and Activision demanding and insisting on eliminating used games , i honestly won't be surprised if there's scenarios such as "If you block used games we will make the next call of duty exclusive to you or elder scrolls or madden ....etc" going on behind closed doors.

Basically, my point of view is that while MS and Sony both probably don't want to block used games the pressure is from the publishers. The EA's and Activisions and Ubisofts.

And if they are planning this, basically there saying people need entertainment and there going to buy it regardless of how intrusive it is. And there almost certainly right.

People complained about online pass then day one dlc and now we have even have micro-transactions and pay 2 play elements in primarily single player games. Yet no one has stopped buying them no matter how much they complained.

The only thing I really agree on is that if MS adds this stuff and Sony doesn't it will spell there doom. But as I feel the driving force isn't the console manufacturers but the game publishers my guess is if this blocking thing is at all true it will be on both consoles.

That may be. But at what point do we, as consumers, say enough is enough. While all those things you mentioned are bad enough, they are for the most part understandable, and not necessarily anti-consumer on a singular basis, just when taken as a whole. Some games use them, some use them in part, some don't use them at all.

This whole thing comes down to ownership of the things we buy. Software ownership has become a struggle for the consumers, when it should have become easier. Publishers have gone from making a commodity, to making a service. As such the service is becoming more and more alienating to consumers in the interest of profits. If that service can't strike a balance between acceptance and profits, then it will be hard times ahead for us gamers, because as you say, we need our entertainment.

Well if they do block used games you know they won't be alone in doing it. No person would block used games unless others are doing it too.So don't expect to hate only one person and say that you will buy this instead of that. No one would be dumb enough to block used games alone.Besides I am not sure why people should think that developers would care anyway.They get nothing off of used games anyway, so why should they be concerned about it being blocked.All developers no matter how much they pretend otherwise would prefer if you brought their game new instead of ignoring it so you could buy it later used and they get nothing from it.Not a productive business venture at all.

It is not their job to facilitate your cheap or picky ways.You always talk about how greedy they are when what you are doing is no less greedy. Them wanting their profits from games is no more or less greedy then you trying to find ways around paying them their due.The only reason you think it is always okay to rob them of their profits is that you are not the one trying to sell something. If it were reversed and you had to deal with it you would not be happy that people passed on your game to buy it used or pirated it so they could get it cheaply.

Wasn't this the same rumor that surrounded the Ps4 a few months ago? Funny how they take turns; i think it is true...that they create these rumors to get the big wigs to release information...and to generate hits on their website... if i was running a lackluster website i would go on record and say "sources have told me microsoft has bought the atari name and license and will introduce the new xbox as the MS ATARI 8200."...now go nuts.